Judge trashes public's right

COURTROOMS ARE supposed to be places where no man - even a judge - is above the law. Someone should explain that essential bit of jurisprudence to Effingham County Superior Court Judge F. Gates Peed.

This week, the Statesboro-based judge from the Ogeechee Judicial Circuit essentially suspended the First Amendment in Effingham County. He instructed deputies of Sheriff Jimmy McDuffie to arrest any newspaper photographer who stood on public property outside the Effingham County Courthouse in Springfield and took a photo of a man who is being tried in a capital murder case.

The judge didn't explain his unconstitutional action. Then again, there are a few judges who don't like to explain themselves, as if black robes give them special powers not shared by mere mortals.

But the courtrooms in this country, even in Effingham County, don't belong to judges. They belong to mere mortals. When any judge - especially one who is elected by voters - forgets his or her role in the judicial process and strips the public of its constitutional rights in a free society, it's time to sound an alarm.

Judge Peed is presiding in the trial of DeAnthony Germaine Griffin, 30, who stands accused in the 2002 murders of David Brian Cribbs Sr. and his two children at their Ebenezer Road home. The triple homicide shocked people in the mostly rural and suburban county, where violent crime is seen as a big-city problem. Consequently, Mr. Griffin's trial has attracted considerable interest. And, since prosecutors are asking for the death penalty - as they should - every effort is being taken to make sure the defendant gets a fair trial.

That's proper, too. But in preserving the defendant's rights, Judge Peed is stepping all over the public's rights. On Tuesday, when Morning News photographer Carl Elmore stood ready on a public thoroughfare outside the courthouse to take photos, a sheriff's deputy told him if he clicked the camera, he would be arrested. The judge, who was walking to his car at the time, told Mr. Elmore he could not take any photos.

Or, to put it more bluntly, take the First Amendment and shove it.

All judges have an obligation to maintain decorum in their courtrooms. Unfortunately, Judge Peed has taken it to the extreme and is applying a muzzle and a straightjacket, inside and outside the courthouse.

Last week, the judge refused to allow a photographer with non-intrusive, silent cameras into the courtroom. Again, he didn't explain himself, even though the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled that access should not be denied by a trial judge unless there's evidence that cameras or recording equipment would be harmful to the rights of the defendant or state.

The last pronouncement on this issue by the state's highest court (WALB-TV v. Gibson, 269 Ga. 564 1998) is quite clear. In that case, the justices reversed an order denying television access because the trial court did not provide basis for finding that the defendant's rights would be jeopardized or could cause a distraction to participants. Without those findings, the court held that the trial court "abused its discretion excluding the camera" from the trial.

Judge Peed has already issued a gag order. He directed that the jury be sequestered as well. Clearly, he has taken steps to ensure fairness. But threatening to arrest photographers outside the courthouse in areas open to the public isn't an attempt to be fair. It's an abuse of judicial powers.

You can't blame deputies for doing what they've been told. The elected sheriff, no doubt, is dancing to the judge's dictates as well.

Since this is a death penalty case, there's an automatic appeal of a conviction. Judge Peed may be on pins and needles and worrying about possible reversible errors. But that's no excuse to trash the First Amendment. In that important test, the judge has already failed.